Can the federal government authorize state spending without state legislative approval?

Last year, President Trump, by executive order, authorized governors to certify to the federal government by a certain date their interest in opting into the federal refugee resettlement program. Governor Lee decided to do so.

However, the General Assembly had previously rejected any involvement in the refugee resettlement program and sued the federal government because the federal program effectively obligated (commandeered) the state to appropriate state funds for government services to refugees.

The Tennessee Constitution delegates control over decisions and authority for setting the budge to the General Assembly. Does the President have the power to authorize a governor to act contrary to his or her state constitution, or state legislature? If a President seeks to provide that power, should a governor still comply with Tennessee’s Constitutional provisions regarding the separation of powers?

We asked all the candidates:

Can the federal government authorize state spending without state legislative approval?

These are were their answers:

The federal government cannot authorize a state’s governor to exercise an authority not given to the governor under the state’s Constitution and, in any event, a governor should adhere to the separation of powers under the state’s Constitution.

The following candidates answered this way.
Janice Bowling

Sen. Janice Bowling

Republican

Senate District 16

Glen Casada

Rep. Glen Casada

Republican

House District 63

Scott Cepicky

Rep. Scott Cepicky

Republican

House District 64

Tandy Darby

Tandy Darby

Republican

House District 76 Candidate

Elaine Davis

Elaine Davis

Republican

House District 13 Candidate

John Dawson

John Dawson

Republican

House District 67 Candidate

Esther Helton

Rep. Esther Helton

Republican

House District 30

Joey Hensley

Sen. Joey Hensley

Republican

Senate District 28

Kelly Keisling

Rep. Kelly Keisling

Republican

House District 38

Tom Leatherwood

Rep. Tom Leatherwood

Republican

House District 99

Becky Duncan Massey

Sen. Becky Duncan Massey

Republican

Senate District 6

Brandon Ogles

Rep. Brandon Ogles

Republican

House District 61

Patricia Possel

Patricia Possel

Republican

House District 96 Candidate

Paul Rose

Sen. Paul Rose

Republican

Senate District 32

Paul Sherrell

Rep. Paul Sherrell

Republican

House District 43

John Stevens

Sen. John Stevens

Republican

Senate District 24

Jarvus Turnley

Jarvus Turnley

Democrat

House District 66 Candidate

Terri Lynn Weaver

Rep. Terri Lynn Weaver

Republican

House District 40

Ryan Williams

Rep. Ryan Williams

Republican

House District 42

Presidential executive orders take precedence over state law.

No candidates have given this answer.

I am unsure.

The following candidates answered this way.
Diane Canada

Diane Canada

Republican

House District 56 Candidate

Other

The following candidates gave their own answers

"Federal law usually takes precedence over state law, but I am unsure about a president’s executive orders. I would need to research this before I can comment. "

Carol Abney

Carol Abney

Democrat Candidate

House District 38

"I think that before churches start paying income taxes they do not have the right to influence policy."

James Gray

James Gray

Independent Candidate

Senate District 28

"I sponsored a bill to require state and local approval before the Gov could consent;The federal government cannot authorize a state’s governor to exercise an authority not given to the governor under the state’s Constitution and, in any event, a governor should adhere to the separation of powers under the state’s Constitution."

Bruce Griffey

Rep. Bruce Griffey

Republican

House District 75

"Republicans cut the federal refugee assistance. Republicans at the Federal level are creating trouble for Republicans at the state level. You can't have it both ways. This has happened since the 1980s. There should be enough federal funding, since refugees are inevitable and a federal matter. If Republicans would be willing to support more federal funding, this wouldn't even be a discussion. It wouldn't cost individual states anything."

Subscribe